E1 - E2 - E3 - E4

Systemic opportunities and challenges for STEM teachers competence development in Greece, Netherlands, Bulgaria and Spain.

The aim of the multiplier events E1,2,3,4 was to communicate and negotiate with policy makers, policy mediators and practitioners outcomes from the analysis of the national contexts of Greece, Netherlands, Bulgaria and Spain, in terms of policy envisions and requirements for STEM teachers competence development - documented in the Intellectual Output O1.

The main themes of the events in each country, as emerged from the analysis of the national contexts, were:

The need for coherence between what is envisioned in policy rhetoric in relation to STEM teachers’ competence development and what is evident in teacher training curricula - the role of innovative training methodologies (Greece)

The impact of teacher learning and teachers’ competence development on school practice (Netherlands)

Focus on the STEM teachers’ training curricula and methods - the role of different stakeholders in teachers’ competence development and the role of teachers’ competences for the development of new generation of Bulgarian youth (Bulgaria)

Focus on STEM policies at both national and regional level, teachers’ training curricula and methods- the role of different stakeholders in teachers’ competence development and the role of teachers’ competences for the development of new generation of Spanish youth (Spain)

The events took place under the European Awareness Scenario Workshop (EASW) methodology, according to which participants - in working groups of varying composition and in plenaries - develop scenarios on the workshop topics, name barriers and propose strategies and steps for realizing the goals and overcoming the barriers. Building on concrete “scenarios” or problem constellations, it invites working group members to think about realistic challenges rather than dreaming up unlikely problems and solving them. Such a workshop follows three phases - the critical analysis phase, the visionary phase and the implementation phase – “to create a basis for local action”. The EASW setting allows for interaction between stakeholders - rather than in which presentations are provided to participants and aim for consensus building rather than instructional approach.

The events were structured in three sessions:

‘Raising issues in homogeneous groups’ session: Opportunities and challenges in STEM teachers training, professional development and ongoing support for competence development

‘Negotiating over the issues in heterogeneous groups’ session: Negotiating over the issues, propose recommendations for effective STEM teachers’ training (curricula, content and approaches) for competence development

‘Structuring in plenary’ session: Mapping the issues and the recommendations onto the EC Competence framework and the national educational reform frameworks.

Expected outcomes of the events: the identification of systemic opportunities and challenges to implement training activities for STEM teachers’ competence development in each of the 4 countries, which will feed the Development Phase of the project.